Here are the transcribed passages from "The Story of Philosophy" by Will Durant, organized by their appearance in the provided images: --- **[Page number not visible, assumed earlier than 165]** "ostentation is a fault in ethics rather than in politics."⁶⁶ Here again one is reminded of Napoleon; Bacon, like the little Corsican, was a simple man enough within his walls, but outside them he affected a ceremony and display which he thought indispensable to public repute. So Bacon runs from field to field, pouring the seed of his thought into every science. At the end of his survey he comes to the conclusion that science by itself is not enough: there must be a force and discipline outside the sciences to coördinate them and point them to a goal. “There is another great and powerful cause why the sciences have made but little progress, which is this. It is not possible to run a course aright when the goal itself has not been rightly placed.”⁶⁷ What science needs is philosophy—the analysis of scientific method, and the coördination of scientific purposes and results; without this, any science must be superficial. “For as no perfect view of a country can be taken from a flat; so it is impossible to discover the remote and deep parts of any science by standing upon the level of the same science, or without ascending to a higher.”⁶⁸ He condemns the habit of looking at isolated facts out of their context, without considering the unity of nature; as if, he says, one should carry a small candle about the corners of a room radiant with a central light. Philosophy, rather than science, is in the long run Bacon’s love; it is only philosophy which can give even to a life of turmoil and grief the stately peace that comes of un-derstanding. “Learning conquers or mitigates the fear of death and adverse fortune.” He quotes Virgil’s great lines: ⁶⁶`Adv. of L., viii, 2.` ⁶⁷`Adv. of L., i, 81.` ⁶⁸`Ibid., i.` --- **[Page number not visible, between earlier page and 165]** ... begin with this book. “This part of human philosophy which regards logic is disagreeable to the taste of many, as appearing to them no other than a net, and a snare of thorny subtlety. . . . But if we would rate things according to their real worth, the rational sciences are the keys to all the rest.”⁷⁸ Philosophy has been barren so long, says Bacon, because she needed a new method to make her fertile. The great mistake of the Greek philosophers was that they spent so much time in theory, so little in observation. But thought should be the aide of observation, not its substitute. “Man,” says the first aphorism of the *Novum Organum*, as if flinging a challenge to all metaphysics,—“Man, as the minister and interpreter of nature, does and understands as much as his observations on the order of nature . . . permit him; and neither knows nor is capable of more.” The predecessors of Socrates were in this matter sounder than his followers; Democritus, in particular, had a nose for facts, rather than an eye for the clouds. No wonder that philosophy has ad-vanced so little since Aristotle’s day; it has been using Aris-totle’s methods. “To go beyond Aristotle by the light of Aristotle is to think that a borrowed light can increase the original light from which is is taken.”⁷⁹ Now, after two ⁷⁸`Macaulay, op. cit., p. 92.` ⁷⁹`Adv. of L., v, 1.` --- **Page 165** thousand years of logic-chopping with the machinery in-vented by Aristotle, philosophy has fallen so low that none will do her reverence. All these medieval theories, theo-rems and disputations must be cast out and forgotten; to renew herself philosophy must begin again with a clean slate and a cleansed mind. The first step, therefore, is the Expurgation of the Intel-lect. We must become as little children, innocent of isms and abstractions, washed clear of prejudices and preconcep-tions. We must destroy the Idols of the mind. An idol, as Bacon uses the word (reflecting perhaps the Protestant rejection of image-worship), is a picture taken for a reality, a thought mistaken for a thing. Errors come under this head; and the first problem of logic is to trace and dam the sources of these errors. Bacon proceeds now to a justly famous analysis of fallacies; “no man,” said Condil-lac, “has better known than Bacon the causes of human error.” These errors are, first, *Idols of the Tribe*,—fallacies natural to humanity in general. “For man’s sense is falsely asserted” (by Protagoras’ “Man is the measure of all things”) “to be the standard of things: on the contrary, all the perceptions, both of the senses and the mind, bear reference to man and not to the universe; and the human mind resembles those uneven mirrors which impart their own properties to different ob-jects . . . and distort and disfigure them.”⁸⁰ Our thoughts are pictures rather of ourselves than of their objects. For exam-ple, “the human understanding, from its peculiar nature, eas-ily supposes a greater degree of order and regularity in things ⁸⁰`Nov. Org., i, 41.` --- **Page 168** ... and neither tear up what the ancients have correctly estab-lished, nor despise the just innovations of the moderns.⁸⁷ Thirdly, *Idols of the Market-place*, arising “from the com-merce and association of men with one another. For men converse by means of language; but words are imposed ac-cording to the understanding of the crowd; and there arises from a bad and inapt formation of words, a wonderful ob-struction to the mind.”⁸⁸ Philosophers deal out infinites with the careless assurance of grammarians handling infini-tives; and yet does any man know what this “infinite” is, or whether it has even taken the precaution of existing? Philosophers talk about “first cause uncaused,” or “first mover unmoved”; but are not these again fig-leaf phrases used to cover naked ignorance, and perhaps indicative of a guilty conscience in the user? Every clear and honest head knows that no cause can be causeless, nor any mover un-moved. Perhaps the greatest reconstruction in philosophy would be simply this—that we should stop lying. Lastly, there are *Idols which have migrated into men’s minds from the various dogmas of philosophers, and also from wrong laws of demonstration*. These I call *Idols of the Theatre*, because in my judgment all the received systems of philosophy are but so many stage-plays, representing worlds of their own creation after an unreal and scenic fash-ion. . . . And in the plays of this philosophic theater you may observe the same thing which is found in the theater of ⁸⁷[Footnote cut off] ⁸⁸`Nov. Org., i, 43.` ---